AP sugarcoats Obama's mentor

Werbung:
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/ap-lies-about-obamas-red-mentor/

Accuracy in Media details how the lib media is running interference for their big-eared boy.

Do you really have this little amount of time on your hands? Christ, we are talking about a guy that died over 20 years ago. If you want to go this route, I am sure we will find some interesting "mentors" for Bush, Cheney and McCain who died 20 years ago. Much less was thier mentors 30 years ago.

We are talking about a guy who was close to Obama when he was by the source you cited, when he was 15-19 years old. This is simply lame. No other words from me can describe this.
 
Do you really have this little amount of time on your hands? Christ, we are talking about a guy that died over 20 years ago. If you want to go this route, I am sure we will find some interesting "mentors" for Bush, Cheney and McCain who died 20 years ago. Much less was thier mentors 30 years ago.

We are talking about a guy who was close to Obama when he was by the source you cited, when he was 15-19 years old. This is simply lame. No other words from me can describe this.

He's just ONE of the evil mentors of Obama throughout his life - this one being during his formative years - and Obama's ultra-leftwing voting record shows the influence persists. Please, DO show us equivalents from McCain's early years (lotsa luck with that :D). But your whole post misses the point, which is the on-going pervasive lib media pro-obama bias.
 
Ah Geez Libs, this isnt even grasping at straws, it is grasping at thin air.

He's just ONE of the evil mentors of Obama throughout his life
How horrible, he knew a long dead communist when he was a teenager. Makes me think about a hockey coach/mentor I was close with whilst in High School. He turned out to be fraudulent wife beater. Served 3 years in the Federal Penn for it. I also had no clue that he hit his wife on a regular basis. It is amazing what happens behind closed doors.
- this one being during his formative years -
I know, those rough teenage years. I wonder how many facists you knew in those days, or if your ultra right wing zealotry came later.
and Obama's ultra-leftwing voting record shows the influence persists.
Isnt it great, I cant wait until he can bring those ultra left wing straight to 1600 Pennsylvania. Just know this, it is the folks like you who put a name into the WH 8 years ago, and the utter ineptness and desire to move well away from the Bush policies that has created the raise of Obama. Nobody to blame but yourselves.
Please, DO show us equivalents from McCain's early years (lotsa luck with that :D).
Putting my funny hat on...I dont think there is written history going back that far!:D
In all reality its a shame that McCain didnt win in 2000. I was a big fan of his then. I still am actually a big fan of McCain. I have a great deal of respect for him. But short of having my best friend on the GOP ticket, there is no way whatsoever I will vote GOP due to thier actions over the last 8 years. I wish there was a viable third or 4th party to vote for, because I am not all that thrilled with the DEMS. But at this rate, I would rather vote for a died red Commie than a Republican.
But your whole post misses the point, which is the on-going pervasive lib media pro-obama bias.
Ah, I like how the point is elusive. So what do you suggest? Specific rules that ensures the same airtime for the candidates?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Libsmasher
He's just ONE of the evil mentors of Obama throughout his life

How horrible, he knew a long dead communist when he was a teenager.

Hey, with your distortion ability, why don't you pitch the salmon and join the lib media? They could use you!

Focus now: As is now well known everywhere but in the lib media and in the feeble minds it informs, Davis was a MENTOR (drop the fish and look that up in the dictionary) of Obama and influenced his thinking.


Makes me think about a hockey coach/mentor I was close with whilst in High School. He turned out to be fraudulent wife beater. Served 3 years in the Federal Penn for it. I also had no clue that he hit his wife on a regular basis. It is amazing what happens behind closed doors.

Comparing a communist with a wife beater - it's THAT kind of thinking that made you President of M.I.T. :p

Quote:
- this one being during his formative years -

I know, those rough teenage years. I wonder how many facists you knew in those days, or if your ultra right wing zealotry came later.

No, I didn't encounter fascists until I met humanties faculty at university.

Quote:
and Obama's ultra-leftwing voting record shows the influence persists.

Isnt it great, I cant wait until he can bring those ultra left wing straight to 1600 Pennsylvania. Just know this, it is the folks like you who put a name into the WH 8 years ago, and the utter ineptness and desire to move well away from the Bush policies that has created the raise of Obama. Nobody to blame but yourselves.

Uh, actually, I've never voted for president, and don't vote at all anymore. And saying we are getting Obama because of Bush is exactly the same thing as saying you'll cut off your nose to spite your face. :D

Quote:
Please, DO show us equivalents from McCain's early years (lotsa luck with that ).

Putting my funny hat on...I dont think there is written history going back that far!

When you can't back up the lame things you say, escape with an even lamer joke.

Quote:
But your whole post misses the point, which is the on-going pervasive lib media pro-obama bias
.

Ah, I like how the point is elusive. So what do you suggest? Specific rules that ensures the same airtime for the candidates?

No, I leave the free speech suppression to those who do it best - liberals.
 
Hey, with your distortion ability, why don't you pitch the salmon and join the lib media? They could use you!

Focus now: As is now well known everywhere but in the lib media and in the feeble minds it informs, Davis was a MENTOR (drop the fish and look that up in the dictionary) of Obama and influenced his thinking.




Comparing a communist with a wife beater - it's THAT kind of thinking that made you President of M.I.T. :p



No, I didn't encounter fascists until I met humanties faculty at university.



Uh, actually, I've never voted for president, and don't vote at all anymore. And saying we are getting Obama because of Bush is exactly the same thing as saying you'll cut off your nose to spite your face. :D



When you can't back up the lame things you say, escape with an even lamer joke.



No, I leave the free speech suppression to those who do it best - liberals.



If anyone admitted Obama knowing, admiring, and being influenced by a big wig communist could be held against him, then they would be trapped, and have to admit knowing a known American terrorist (William Aires) could be held against him too...... then the list would grow. I don’t think Obama knows a normal person.

So of course it has to be a non issue other wise it opens a can of worms to everyone else obama knows and the kool aid drinking followers ignore.

It will not matter how down low (haha play on words) Obama goes, his followers will follow just like good sheep do. Posts like yours are only confirmation to those of us who are not blind sheep sucking kool aid. Don’t dare to hope it will get any of them thinking.


Don’t forget……………..He is The One we have been waiting for!


He brings change, hope and ……………………


The judgment to lead (even if he is just following the failed commies before him)
 
I know commies whats your point? am I evil now?



Are you evil? I have no idea. But from what I have seen you type in forums I would say no you are not evil.


I know open communists too. Some of them are school teachers. One of them teaches Current events in a middle school the other American history. SCARY!!!

But neither of them I would say is evil. I actually like them both very much, I just disagree totally on political issues and would never send either of them to represent my city-state or country. Heck I would not send them to represent my local union :)

My point is that Obama admitted in his book he was drawn to the Marxists teachers and their ideas. When he speaks now, his ideas are communistic socialistic and humanistic and not really anything America was founded on, showing me that he still holds those ideas.

Knowing a certain type of person doesn’t make you a bad person or even say that you are “into” their style of thinking.

Surrounding yourself with a certain type of people, repeating much of what they say till people don’t like it then saying you never knew they spoke that way….. Is at the very least questionable IMHO
 
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/ap-lies-about-obamas-red-mentor/

Accuracy in Media details how the lib media is running interference for their big-eared boy.

OK I read the story you linked and the AP story that it is discussing.

Yes the AP story did sugar coat Franks communism. Yes it was bad, even dishonest, journalism.

And yes I agree with others here that by itself O's being associated with one man whose communism has been sugar coated is not that big a deal.

Yet for those who are paying attention it is clear that O not only knew a communist here or there but he surrounded himself with all sorts of extreme types and was influenced greatly by them.

Libsmasher, for you to make this a real thread all you have to do is list 5 more of O's extreme relationships to show a trend.
 
If anyone admitted Obama knowing, admiring, and being influenced by a big wig communist could be held against him, then they would be trapped, and have to admit knowing a known American terrorist (William Aires) could be held against him too...... then the list would grow. I don’t think Obama knows a normal person.

So of course it has to be a non issue other wise it opens a can of worms to everyone else obama knows and the kool aid drinking followers ignore.

It will not matter how down low (haha play on words) Obama goes, his followers will follow just like good sheep do. Posts like yours are only confirmation to those of us who are not blind sheep sucking kool aid. Don’t dare to hope it will get any of them thinking.


Don’t forget……………..He is The One we have been waiting for!


He brings change, hope and ……………………


The judgment to lead (even if he is just following the failed commies before him)

But notice we expect nothing of intellectual activity from the Bots. Deep down, they only deserve our pity. The problem is the liberal media - one almost longs for the days when the liberal media establishment would work their biased magic with sophistication and a certain subtlety.

I understand completely what the lib media is and what it does, but one would expect that at least they'd have some residual DIGNITY - enough to at least keep the POSE of disinterested professional journalists. Instead, they reduce themselves to almost the level of Bot teenagers at an Obama pep rally. Just imagine the lib media hyper activity if McCain had any equivalent associations in his past to those Obama has?
 
But notice we expect nothing of intellectual activity from the Bots. Deep down, they only deserve our pity. The problem is the liberal media - one almost longs for the days when the liberal media establishment would work their biased magic with sophistication and a certain subtlety.

I understand completely what the lib media is and what it does, but one would expect that at least they'd have some residual DIGNITY - enough to at least keep the POSE of disinterested professional journalists. Instead, they reduce themselves to almost the level of Bot teenagers at an Obama pep rally. Just imagine the lib media hyper activity if McCain had any equivalent associations in his past to those Obama has?

I have to disagree with you on this one LibSmasher. The liberal people are even more liberal than the media. I have talked to people who actually think that pmsnbc is actually right wing. The people themselves have gone so far left that the media can not keep up. Not all democrats, just the far far left. And in all fairness the far far right thinks fox is so left wing they cant hardly watch it.

The people are more of a problem than the media. IMO


But I respect your opinions, thankfully we live in the only country you can still say what you want.......... though it wont be long before we lose that if hte far left gets their way.
 
Werbung:
I have to disagree with you on this one LibSmasher. The liberal people are even more liberal than the media. I have talked to people who actually think that pmsnbc is actually right wing. The people themselves have gone so far left that the media can not keep up. Not all democrats, just the far far left. And in all fairness the far far right thinks fox is so left wing they cant hardly watch it.

The people are more of a problem than the media. IMO


But I respect your opinions, thankfully we live in the only country you can still say what you want.......... though it wont be long before we lose that if hte far left gets their way.

One comment: Someone who is such an unredeemable flake as to call msnbc rightwing doesn't thereby move the lib media to the political center for any rational person.

Here's some more comment on the lib media's love fest with Obama, and the lib media's arrogance, that they share as a characteristic with Obama (NR, July 14, 2008 - Emery is from the Weekly Standard):

In Love and Hauteur
Obama and the press, sneering together

NOEMIE EMERY

The press is in love, really in love, the kind of love that comes twice in a century. Sure, it has had crushes before — on John McCain and Bill Clinton — but those were mere infatuations, and the ardor ebbed quickly. In the cold light of day, the press is finding McCain not quite as cute as they thought him; and as for the old flame, Bill Clinton, when the going got tough and he took swipes at its new love, the press tossed him under the bus and backed over him, most notably with a particularly salacious hit piece — by the husband of one of his former assistants! — in a recent issue of Vanity Fair. That previously Clinton-loving magazine now has a passion for Barack Obama, as do Time and Newsweek, which embarrass themselves on a near-weekly basis. NBC exists mainly to ooze Obamadoration, with other news outlets not far behind.

“Many journalists are not merely observers but participants in the Obama phenomenon,” write John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei of Politico.com. Harris thinks some of his reporters need “detox” to get over their rapture, while VandeHei adds, “There is no doubt reporters are smitten with Obama’s speeches and promises to change politics.” What causes this madness in rational people? Nothing too mad: similar outlooks and interests in common. The press and Obama are a match made in heaven. This isn’t insanity, but the product of wholly predictable forces, coming together in an outcome that seems preordained.

Obama was not born into the elite, but he has joined it by training and by inclination, and in this sense his journey mirrors that of the press, which began as a trade that drew people from all parts of the culture but has become an exclusive profession, staffed largely by upper-middle-class people who feel a strong sense of mission and an equally great self-regard. Now it shows all the signs of an institution in an advanced stage of decadence: It has built a multimillion-dollar shrine to itself in Washington, along with numerous schools and institutions study its “excellence” (which seems to decline as these studies proliferate), and it convenes endless panels to extol its importance and mission, even as scandals plague its most prominent newsrooms and its ratings and circulation figures decline.

As a result, the press becomes more and more like the academic community, Obama’s electoral base, which is similarly out of touch with the larger American public. His support in the press approaches that in the college towns, where he rolled up impressive majorities. Bill Clinton came from Hope, as did Mike Huckabee, but to the press Obama has become Hope personified. Journalists are Obama’s disciples; he is their prophet, the mirror in which they see themselves. And journalists spend a lot of time looking in the mirror.

As the press changed, it altered its view of the country: from tough love combined with celebration to a relentless, unending critique. Its practitioners’ main theme was that people unlike them (their readers, for example) were dumb, biased, afraid, reason-deficient, and easily manipulated (by Republican agents) to act on their resentments and fears. In 1984, after Reagan won 49 states, James Reston, dean of the press corps, mourned journalists’ failure to enlighten the masses: “Among the losers in this presidential election campaign you will have to include the nosy scribblers of the press,” he lamented that dire November morning. “Not since the days of H. L. Mencken have so many reporters written so much or so well about the shortcomings of the President and influenced so few voters. . . . Most Washington reporters were on to his evasive tactics, easy cheerfulness, and unsteady grasp of the facts. They did not hesitate to point out his deficits, personal and fiscal, condemn his windy theorizing, and mock his zigzag contortions, but Mr. Reagan had the photographers and television cameramen for allies and proved that one picture on the nightly news can be worth a million votes.”

Today’s press is still using this all-purpose critique to account for, and tarnish, Republican victories: “The Republican Party has been successfully scaring voters since 1968, when Richard Nixon built a Silent Majority out of lower- and-middle class folks frightened or disturbed by hippies and student radicals and blacks rioting in the inner cities,” Newsweek explained recently, warning that “it is a sure bet that the GOP will try to paint Obama as ‘the other’ — as a haughty black intellectual who has Muslim roots.” This same kind of explanation was dragged out to explain why Reagan beat Jimmy Carter and Walter F. Mondale, why George H. W. Bush beat Michael Dukakis, and why George W. Bush beat Al Gore and John Kerry, in the latter case with the help of nearly 300 of Kerry’s Vietnam War comrades, who thought their old friend was a fraud. The press hated the 1988 campaign, with its furlough and Pledge of Allegiance issues, and loathed the testosterone fest that was the Republicans’ 2004 convention, in particular the speech by Zell Miller, which stunned and appalled most of the media but made little impression on voters.

So when Obama appeared — cool, suave, urbane, and much hipper than they were — they had found their revenge and their voice. They were thrilled when he said that wearing a flag pin was a meaningless gesture and proposed a new kind of patriotism that did not include cheering. They nodded in approval when, listing laudable ways of serving one’s country, he included the Peace Corps, teaching, and community service, but left out the armed forces. When the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his pastor for 20 years, was criticized for delivering tirades against whites and American culture, they defended Obama, not least because many of them agreed with the preacher; some blamed the critics of Wright’s racism for being racists themselves. And when Obama told a well-heeled crowd at a billionaire’s home in San Francisco that small-town Pennsylvanians “cling” to religion and guns from misplaced desperation, they were not at all bothered, as that was what they had believed all the time.
 
Back
Top